Suchergebnisse

The great war developed many new weapons—the submarine, the aeroplane, the long range gun, the tank, the deadly gas; but one of the most novel and deadly was the propaganda—the psychological working on the war will of the enemy. It was developed first and effectually used by the Central Powers against France, England, the United States, and with terrible results in Russia and Italy. But the Allies were not far behind, and by the close of the war had caught up with their foes and probably surpassed them. In the summer of 1918, the German press complained of the relative weakness of their propaganda, and declared the enemy's pen and propaganda were worse than his sword.After the work of the Committee on Public Information, under Mr. George Creel, had been under way for a number of months in the United States, it was deemed advisable to establish branch offices of the committee in many European countries for the purpose of explaining the war aims and preparations of our country. Such offices were established in England, France, Italy, and eventually in some thirty-two foreign countries, in charge of Mr. Will Irwin and later of Mr. Edward Lisson. For the purpose of organizing the work in Italy, the writer was sent over by the committee, arriving in Rome about March, 1918, and returning in October.

Should political science be publicly relevant? Instead of furnishing a direct answer, I propose to complicate the question. Yet in doing so, I will indicate an answer. And the answer is yes, political science should be publicly relevant – but not in any simple sense, since 'political science', 'should' and indeed 'publicly relevant' are less straightforward than they might seem. In what follows I will first complicate the questions posed to political science. I will proceed to reflect on the connection between publication – one of the central activities of all science, including political science – and publicity. I will then briefly tell a story about the journal that I edit, Perspectives on Politics, and the distinctive mission of this journal, which is to serve as 'a political science public sphere'. I will conclude with some brief reflections on the best ways of thinking about how political science can and should be 'publicly relevant'.